An Automatic CADI’s Ionogram Scaling Software Tool for Large Ionograms Data Analytics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scale the ionosonde ionograms to produce accurate readings is a professional manual scaling technique. However, there is a high demand for auto-scaling software that can manage a large number of ionograms in order to avoid the time and effort involved in manual scaling as well as human errors. Noise-free, accurate trace identification and precise segmentation are required for the auto-scaling program to work. The Canadian Advanced Digital Ionosonde (CADI) ionograms are processed and auto-scaled using a new model on an open-source (Python) platform in this paper. Filtering the noise, Convolution Neural Network (CNN) based trace detection, layer-wise segmentation, and then extracting the ionospheric features are used to accomplish the scaling accuracy. The investigation uses raw ionogram files generated by the CADI system in Hyderabad, India (Lat:$17.47^{\circ }\text{N}$, Long:$78.57^{\circ }\text{E}$) between 2014 and 2015. Raw ionograms in$^\ast $.md4 or$^\ast $.md2 file formats can be accepted by the suggested model (Individual or Hourly integrated). The proposed auto-scaling software tool’s individual block performance is examined with several classes of ionograms, and the overall performance is evaluated with a huge set of ionograms obtained during adverse space weather circumstances (16th to 18th March 2015). Univap Digital Ionosonde Data Analysis (UDIDA) software tool was considered for manual scaling. The results of manual scaling are compared with that of proposed scaling software. In fmin and h’f, respectively, the proposed model has a mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.36 MHz and 11.72 km, and a root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.7 MHz and 22.36 km.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.061 | 0.014 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".